Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Third Judicial Region
Branch 63
Tarlac City

ROBERTO SENTRY R. REYNALDO,

Plaintiff,

-versus-
Civil Case No.
For:
FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC.,
CHRISTOPHER RONN Q. PAGCO,
MA. SHIELA G. REYES, ANIWAY L.
BARCELONA, and RENATO
SILVESTRE
Defendants.
x------------------------------------------------x

JOINT ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

with COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS

DEFENDANTS FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC., CHRISTOPHER

RONN Q. PAGCO, MA. SHIELA G. REYES, ANIWAY L.
BARCELONA, and RENATO SILVESTRE, hereinafter collectively
referred to as “Defendants”, by counsel, jointly respectfully state:

1. On May 04, 2019 Defendants received a copy of the Complaint

dated 03 May 2019. Defendants have until 19 May 2019 to file their
Answer to the Complaint.

Hence, this Joint Answer to the Complaint with Compulsory

Counterclaims.

Admissions

2. The Defendants admit Paragraphs 1,5,6,7, 8, 9, 11, and

12 of the Complaint.

3. Defendants admit Paragraph 2 of the Complaint only insofar

as the it states that the defendant is a non-stock corporation, its
principal address and the names of the trustees who may receive
summons.

1
 Defendants specifically deny CHRISTOPHER RONN Q.
PAGCO, MA. SHIELA G. REYES, ANIWAY L. BARCELONA, and
RENATO SILVESTRE to be impleaded as “defendants”. Being a duly
registered non-stock corporation, the FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC. has
a personality distinct and separate from its members. It only exercises
its corporate powers thru its Board of Trustees in accordance with the
Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines.

4. Defendants admit Paragraph 10 of the Complaint only insofar

as the it states that the Board has to adjourn abruptly and that the
plaintiff has to be forcefully ejected from the premises. Defendant
Silvestre did not humiliate nor insulted the plaintiff.

Specific Denials

5. Defendants specifically deny Paragraph 3 of the Complaint

the truth of the matter being that per records of FIREFOX IGNIGHTE,
INC. the Plaintiff is not appointed as a corporate officer of the company.
As clearly enumerated in the By-laws of the corporation, only the
President, Corporate Secretary and Treasurer are the corporate
officers.

A copy of FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC. By-Laws is hereto

attached as Annex “1”.

6. Defendants specifically deny Paragraph 4 of the Complaint

that trustee Barcelona is always critical as regards his legal opinions
on financial matters. Since Defendant Barcelona has a wide
experience in financial matters she is in the right position to discuss
her personal opinion on the matters. All discussions as evidenced by
the minutes of meeting were done objectively and in a nice and
professional manner.

7. The Defendants specifically deny Paragraph 13 of the

Complaint that the plaintiff was removed in bad faith. Being a mere
employee of the corporation the plaintiff is bounded by the policies and
procedures of the company and as well as the Labor Code of the
Philippines. As provided by the Labor Code an employer may
terminate an employee based on JUST CAUSES.

8. The Defendants specifically deny Paragraph 14 of the

Complaint that the plaintiff was a corporate officer. His appointment as
legal counsel is as a mere employee not a corporate officer. His rights
to due process under the labor code has also been observed by giving
him the chance to explain in writing and thru a conference hearing
during the special meeting called for the purpose. Plaintiffs allegation

2
that at least 2/3 vote of the members is required for his removal is
misplaced because he is not a corporate officer.

9. Defendants specifically deny the allegations in Paragraph

15 Complaint for lack of basis.

Affirmative and Special Defenses

10. Defendants replead the foregoing and further states thus:

The Court Has NO JURISDICTION over the defendants

11. FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC. is a corporation duly organized under

the laws of the Republic of the Philippines has a juridical personality
separate and distinct from its members. Hence, defendant Barcelona,
Reyes, Pagco and Reyes should not be impleaded. If the court has no
jurisdiction over the defendants, the complaint must be dismissed.

The Court Has NO JURISDICTION

over the subject matter as The Complaint is purely a labor
dispute NOT an intra-corporate dispute where RTC has
jurisdiction

11. FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC. under its by-laws enumerates the

President, Secretary and Treasurer as the only Corporate officers of
the corporation. Legal Counsel is but a mere employee of the
corporation. The plaintiff is not a corporate officer hence, there is no
intra-corporate dispute.

The basic rule is that when the court has no jurisdiction over the
subject matter the complaint must be dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction under Rule 16 of the Rules of Court .

The Plaintiff Has NO CAUSE OF ACTION Against the Defendants

As The Complaint is Utterly Self-Serving And Bereft of Bases

12. The termination of employment of the plaintiff is done with

due process. He abandoned his duty before he was even terminated
as clearly stated on his complaint.

3
 COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS

13. By way of Counterclaim, Defendant FIREFOX IGNIGHTE,

INC. alleges the following:

First Cause of Action

Moral Damages

14. The foregoing allegations are reproduced and repleaded

herein by reference.

15. Having been precipitately dragged into this wasteful and

worthless case upon a malevolent Complaint, Defendant FIREFOX
IGNIGHTE, INC. suffered besmirched business reputation.

16. In light of the foregoing, Plaintiff should be held liable to

Defendant FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC. for not less than One
Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP 100,000.00) in Moral Damages.

Second Cause of Action

Exemplary Damages

17. The foregoing allegations are reproduced and repleaded

herein by reference.

18. As an example for the public good and as a deterrent

against others similarly disposed as the Plaintiff whose act of filing this
unfounded Complaint not only prejudiced Defendant FIREFOX
IGNIGHTE, INC. but likewise severely undermined the confidence its
members, and the school (Tarlac State University), Plaintiff should be
held liable for Exemplary Damages in favor of the Defendant
FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC. in the amount of not less than Fifty
Thousand Pesos (PhP 50,000.00).

Third Cause of Action

Costs of Suit and Attorney’s Fees

19. The foregoing allegations are reproduced and repleaded

herein by reference.

20. By reason of the Plaintiff’s malicious filing of a Complaint

that is anchored upon baseless claims, Defendant FIREFOX
IGNIGHTE, INC. and its co-defendants were compelled to jointly

4
engage the services of counsel and to litigate herein instead of
attending to its lawful business and the welfare of its members.

21. Thus, the Plaintiff should be held liable to Defendant

FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC. and Defendants Barcelona, Pagco,
Silvestre and Reyes in the amount of no less than Two Hundred
Pesos (PhP 200,000.00) for Attorney’s Fees and must likewise be
held liable for the Costs of the instant suit.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Defendants

respectfully prays that the Honorable Court render judgment:

1. DISMISSING the Complaint as against all the Defendants

for utter lack of jurisdiction, cause of action and bases;

2. Upon its counterclaim, Plaintiff be DIRECTED to pay the

Defendant FIREFOX IGNIGHTE, INC. the following:

a. Not less than One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP

100,000.00) in Moral Damages;

b. Not less than Fifty Thousand Pesos (P 50,000.00) in

Exemplary Damages;

C. Not less than Two Hundred Thousand ( P 200,000.00) as

Attorney’s Fees; and

d. The COSTS of the instant suit.

Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

Tarlac City, 6 May 2019.

JAROMAY LAURENTE PAMAOS

LAW OFFICES
Counsel for Defendants FIREFOX IGNIGHTE,
INC., Barcelona, Pagco, Silvetre and Reyes
2nd Floor, Tarlac State University School of
Law, Tarlac City, Tarlac
Telefax (045) 931-3751

5
 By:

STEPHEN V. JAROMAY
Roll No. 43212
IBP No. AR000660; 01/04/18, Quezon City
PTR No. 5521804; 01/04/18, Quezon City
MCLE Compliance No. V-0017246; 4/7/16

PATRICIA LETICIA R. SUSON

Roll No. 66235
IBP Lifetime No. 1041496; Quezon City
PTR No. 5521809; 1/04/18; Quezon City
MCLE-exempt, per MCLE Governing Board
Order No. 1 s. 2008.

Copy furnished:

THE LICUDINE LAW OFFICE

Counsel for the Plaintiff
CAREMCO Bldg., LMS Cpd. Diego Silang,
Tarlac City

EXPLANATION FOR SERVICE

BY REGISTERED MAIL

A copy of this Joint Answer to the Amended Complaint was filed

and served upon the Plaintiff via registered mail and fast courier since
undersigned counsel momentarily lacks available personnel to effect
personal service thereof. Likewise, the undersigned counsel has
equally important matters to attend to which prevent her from
personally serving the same.

PATRICIA LETICIA R. SUSON